<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Some questions about ID cards</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2004/04/28/some-questions-about-id-cards/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2004/04/28/some-questions-about-id-cards/</link>
	<description>Because all the other domain names were taken</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:53:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Peck</title>
		<link>http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2004/04/28/some-questions-about-id-cards/comment-page-1/#comment-124</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Peck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2004 15:03:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/blog/?p=331#comment-124</guid>
		<description>&lt;german accent&gt;&quot;Papers, pleasea&quot;&lt;/german accent&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&lt;german accent&gt;&#8221;Papers, pleasea&#8221;&lt;/german accent&gt;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom</title>
		<link>http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2004/04/28/some-questions-about-id-cards/comment-page-1/#comment-123</link>
		<dc:creator>tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2004 03:19:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/blog/?p=331#comment-123</guid>
		<description>Your right, you know. You &lt;i&gt;would&lt;/i&gt; have been up all night if you&#039;d carried on writing about this. I was...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(By which I mean, I gone and done a response which is waaay to long to fit in here, but can be read &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.flashboy.org/bloog.html&quot;&gt;over there&lt;/a&gt;. Contains rambling and tangents.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your right, you know. You <i>would</i> have been up all night if you&#8217;d carried on writing about this. I was&#8230;</p>
<p>(By which I mean, I gone and done a response which is waaay to long to fit in here, but can be read <a href="http://www.flashboy.org/bloog.html">over there</a>. Contains rambling and tangents.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander</title>
		<link>http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2004/04/28/some-questions-about-id-cards/comment-page-1/#comment-122</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:59:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/blog/?p=331#comment-122</guid>
		<description>Firstly, I think this is just a distraction from Blair&#039;s Euro referendum. He&#039;s in the shit with that one, so encouraging the rather dense Blunko to follow through with his hobby horse is a good way of diverting the attention of the media and critics. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But I doubt this Bill will in fact come to much. The trials will no doubt be a shambles, the committee stage will further dilute the bill, the commons may see yet another rebellion (remember that most of the cabinet does not want the poxy things either) and the Lords will no doubt throw it out. It simply won&#039;t be worth Bliar&#039;s time and effort to push on with it - he&#039;ll be too busy worrying about the Euro elections, the referendum - and another General Election. He could wheel out the Parliament Act - but if he&#039;s not willing to do that on the fox hunt ban, which would no doubt be &#039;popular, he&#039;s hardly going to use it to push through a bill that has seriously pissed off a small but vocal minority. Having yet another constitutional showdown with the Lords is not in Blair&#039;s interest, and besides it&#039;s not as if he&#039;s serious about it. As I have said, he&#039;s just trying to distract us for a while. Blunkett&#039;s loss of face, and perhaps job, is hardly going to make Tony weep, at least in private.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And that&#039;s if this scheme DOES go any further. It&#039;s becoming clear that ID cards won&#039;t work, and if the dozy British public don&#039;t realise this, there are a lot of influential people who will. Blunko&#039;s scheme may well whither on the vine, but that&#039;s not really the point...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;...The point is, we have a Home Secretary who&#039;s willing to impose sinister, intrusive measures on the British people on a national scale, and not for the first time. Sometimes I really do think I should do a runner to Canada, because this country seems hellbent on fucking itself and all who dwell within it. And since so many of us don&#039;t mind living in an increasingly authoritarian society, it seems we&#039;ve got the government we deserve. We&#039;re drowning in stupidity, apathy and masochism, ID cards or no ID cards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Firstly, I think this is just a distraction from Blair&#8217;s Euro referendum. He&#8217;s in the shit with that one, so encouraging the rather dense Blunko to follow through with his hobby horse is a good way of diverting the attention of the media and critics. </p>
<p>But I doubt this Bill will in fact come to much. The trials will no doubt be a shambles, the committee stage will further dilute the bill, the commons may see yet another rebellion (remember that most of the cabinet does not want the poxy things either) and the Lords will no doubt throw it out. It simply won&#8217;t be worth Bliar&#8217;s time and effort to push on with it &#8211; he&#8217;ll be too busy worrying about the Euro elections, the referendum &#8211; and another General Election. He could wheel out the Parliament Act &#8211; but if he&#8217;s not willing to do that on the fox hunt ban, which would no doubt be &#8216;popular, he&#8217;s hardly going to use it to push through a bill that has seriously pissed off a small but vocal minority. Having yet another constitutional showdown with the Lords is not in Blair&#8217;s interest, and besides it&#8217;s not as if he&#8217;s serious about it. As I have said, he&#8217;s just trying to distract us for a while. Blunkett&#8217;s loss of face, and perhaps job, is hardly going to make Tony weep, at least in private.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s if this scheme DOES go any further. It&#8217;s becoming clear that ID cards won&#8217;t work, and if the dozy British public don&#8217;t realise this, there are a lot of influential people who will. Blunko&#8217;s scheme may well whither on the vine, but that&#8217;s not really the point&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8230;The point is, we have a Home Secretary who&#8217;s willing to impose sinister, intrusive measures on the British people on a national scale, and not for the first time. Sometimes I really do think I should do a runner to Canada, because this country seems hellbent on fucking itself and all who dwell within it. And since so many of us don&#8217;t mind living in an increasingly authoritarian society, it seems we&#8217;ve got the government we deserve. We&#8217;re drowning in stupidity, apathy and masochism, ID cards or no ID cards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

